It's about time...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Top End
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's about time...
So who in Darwin received an anonymous letter under their door this morning regarding the follies of a certain charter company operating out of Darwin.... We did!
The rumour is that all GA companys and this persons' mailing list received it.
Anyone?
The rumour is that all GA companys and this persons' mailing list received it.
Anyone?
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: North son, I say go North..........
Posts: 599
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you recieved a copy of this defamation I request that you put it in a fresh envelope and deliver it to me.
Think of me however you may, that is your right. It is not however the right of a disgruntled individual to discredit an individual or company.
The legal process has already started on this one. Solictors/ Private Investigators have been employed. Who ever did this when caught will be dealt with in the harshest way possible.
Think of me however you may, that is your right. It is not however the right of a disgruntled individual to discredit an individual or company.
The legal process has already started on this one. Solictors/ Private Investigators have been employed. Who ever did this when caught will be dealt with in the harshest way possible.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Aust
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As Stefan says, you can have a crack at him but this sort of crap is way out of line. It could potentially be extremely costly for the culprit. I can't figure out the logic. This sort of crap impacts on all the staff as much as it does on Stefan. Even if you couldn't stand him why would you want to stick it up all the staff?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But was it TRUE!!!!
Your absolutely right HA, as the Webster's dictionary defines, "de-fame... v.t. to harm or destroy the good name or reputation of; to slander. defamation n..." So clearly, defamation is not only limited to stuff that’s untrue.
bitter balance
The impact that this material may have on the whole staff is regrettable, but sadly it is full of truth... 11 crashes... pressure to under-log duty... unendorsed defects... etc. It’s sad when pilots loose out, but dodgy operators cannot be ignored.
bitter balance
The impact that this material may have on the whole staff is regrettable, but sadly it is full of truth... 11 crashes... pressure to under-log duty... unendorsed defects... etc. It’s sad when pilots loose out, but dodgy operators cannot be ignored.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Aust
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jon.pierre, if its true and of immediate concern then take it through the correct channels. Better still, front HA and tell him you are taking it through the proper channels. This sort of action may hide behind the guise of safety but its obviously just an old fashioned get square by someone without the testicular fortitude to act on it properly. I think Len Veger is still an FOI in DN. If its true go and see Len.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Desperate measures?
bitter,
I could not agree more and I hope that the person, who did the overnight delivery of this damning document, is reading this thread.
Problem is if they are still working for HA, they cannot (I'm am told) go through the proper channels for the same reason that they cannot (I'm am told) write up defects, or (I'm am told) press for better pay and conditions. If they do, they'll not only loose their job (I'm am told) but screw their chances for future employ(I'm am told). Pilots who are inexperienced with high aspirations are easily pressured and manipulated.
If the distributor, who does have (I'm am told) very accurate and current information regarding the operations of NAC is no longer employed by them, he certainly should have contacted Len the day he left. If not, then get onto it.
Perhaps, before condemning the author, we should stop and show some empathy for staff, it would seem, harassed and bullied and eventually sacked or forced to leave as no progression in the company remains. Perhaps a pilot so disillusioned about there career path who now feels worthless saw this as the only thing that would be noticed.
With HA’s legendary connections and PR machine at work, maybe he/she was right.
I could not agree more and I hope that the person, who did the overnight delivery of this damning document, is reading this thread.
Problem is if they are still working for HA, they cannot (I'm am told) go through the proper channels for the same reason that they cannot (I'm am told) write up defects, or (I'm am told) press for better pay and conditions. If they do, they'll not only loose their job (I'm am told) but screw their chances for future employ(I'm am told). Pilots who are inexperienced with high aspirations are easily pressured and manipulated.
If the distributor, who does have (I'm am told) very accurate and current information regarding the operations of NAC is no longer employed by them, he certainly should have contacted Len the day he left. If not, then get onto it.
Perhaps, before condemning the author, we should stop and show some empathy for staff, it would seem, harassed and bullied and eventually sacked or forced to leave as no progression in the company remains. Perhaps a pilot so disillusioned about there career path who now feels worthless saw this as the only thing that would be noticed.
With HA’s legendary connections and PR machine at work, maybe he/she was right.
Last edited by jon.pierre; 9th Apr 2004 at 10:27.
Join Date: Jan 1998
Location: somewhere in the nth of Oz, where it isn't really cold
Posts: 884
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gentlemen,
It is indeed a sad indictment on the aviation fraternity if someone feels the need to take the course of action as described.
Irrespective of what you may think or feel there are ALWAYS avenues of claiming re-dress if you are wronged, or indiscretions are being committed against others (employer/employee). This act isn't one of them.
Without entering into a technical discussion on the vagaries of the law here, I remind you that this bulletin board and anything typed by you and consequently entered onto it can be held in the same regard as the 'offending' 4 page document.
The person who prepared and distributed the document can have plausible defences to an action in the tort of defamation, (libel as it involves a written document, and is regarded as permanent).
Similarly, the company and it's noteworthy director may not have an action if the document is prepared primarily based on truth.
It goes without saying that there are other issues connected with the last 2 para's but I use those to demonstrate that this isn't quite as cut and dried as you may think.
In any case, I'm sure that HA would not be offended by healthy rigorous debate on some matters .. lord knows he has copped enough flack over the 6+ years I've been around this BB .. but I urge careful thought before hitting the enter button, for anything connected to this matter.
The joys of being an aussie, passionate & vigorous discussion - we are free to express our opinions, provided they are our honestly held opinions and they are based on true fact .. not on hearsay heard on the field from the refueller who heard it from the lame etc etc etc ...
".....but I urge careful thought before hitting the enter button, for anything connected to this matter."
Me too!!!!! Indeed, this thread will disappear quicker than a cold beer on a hot day if anyone posts any content from the alleged document. And the poster will be out of the PPRuNe party!!!
Woomera
It is indeed a sad indictment on the aviation fraternity if someone feels the need to take the course of action as described.
Irrespective of what you may think or feel there are ALWAYS avenues of claiming re-dress if you are wronged, or indiscretions are being committed against others (employer/employee). This act isn't one of them.
Without entering into a technical discussion on the vagaries of the law here, I remind you that this bulletin board and anything typed by you and consequently entered onto it can be held in the same regard as the 'offending' 4 page document.
The person who prepared and distributed the document can have plausible defences to an action in the tort of defamation, (libel as it involves a written document, and is regarded as permanent).
Similarly, the company and it's noteworthy director may not have an action if the document is prepared primarily based on truth.
It goes without saying that there are other issues connected with the last 2 para's but I use those to demonstrate that this isn't quite as cut and dried as you may think.
In any case, I'm sure that HA would not be offended by healthy rigorous debate on some matters .. lord knows he has copped enough flack over the 6+ years I've been around this BB .. but I urge careful thought before hitting the enter button, for anything connected to this matter.
The joys of being an aussie, passionate & vigorous discussion - we are free to express our opinions, provided they are our honestly held opinions and they are based on true fact .. not on hearsay heard on the field from the refueller who heard it from the lame etc etc etc ...
".....but I urge careful thought before hitting the enter button, for anything connected to this matter."
Me too!!!!! Indeed, this thread will disappear quicker than a cold beer on a hot day if anyone posts any content from the alleged document. And the poster will be out of the PPRuNe party!!!
Woomera
Last edited by Woomera; 9th Apr 2004 at 11:11.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please explain
The person who prepared and distributed the document can have plausible defences to an action in the tort of defamation, (libel as it involves a written document, and is regarded as permanent).
Similarly, the company and it's noteworthy director may not have an action if the document is prepared primarily based on truth.
Similarly, the company and it's noteworthy director may not have an action if the document is prepared primarily based on truth.
...there ALWAYS avenues of claiming re-dress if you are wronged, or indiscretions are being committed against others (employer/employee). This act isn't one of them.
)
Last edited by jon.pierre; 9th Apr 2004 at 11:31.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jon.pierre
Its been some time since I practiced law (even longer since I had anything to do with defamation) but essentially defamation (its all defamation these days as the distinction between slander and libel has gone) is a statement that lowers a pesons reputation in the eyes of other people.
Its not enough that the subject of the statement feels that their reputation has been lowered but the feeling of other people towards that person that is important.
In most Australian jurisdictions truth alone is not a defence. There must be an overriding benefit to the public in the statement being published. I believe the only exception to that is in New South Wales (the defamation capital in Australia if not the world).
The courts have balanced the right of freedom of speech against the right to reputation and for some time the right to reputation was given precedence although the pendulum may be swinging the other way again given some recent High Court cases.
Hope this helps and if there are any practicing lawyers out there please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. As I said its been some years now.
Its been some time since I practiced law (even longer since I had anything to do with defamation) but essentially defamation (its all defamation these days as the distinction between slander and libel has gone) is a statement that lowers a pesons reputation in the eyes of other people.
Its not enough that the subject of the statement feels that their reputation has been lowered but the feeling of other people towards that person that is important.
In most Australian jurisdictions truth alone is not a defence. There must be an overriding benefit to the public in the statement being published. I believe the only exception to that is in New South Wales (the defamation capital in Australia if not the world).
The courts have balanced the right of freedom of speech against the right to reputation and for some time the right to reputation was given precedence although the pendulum may be swinging the other way again given some recent High Court cases.
Hope this helps and if there are any practicing lawyers out there please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. As I said its been some years now.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the " allegations ", can is some form be quantified, then i would suggest it's not Defamation.
i.e. if you are called an idiot, and this can be quantified, being called an idiot is not defamation.
i.e. if you are called an idiot, and this can be quantified, being called an idiot is not defamation.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: I wish I new
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hows this sit Plovett,
Rumor round is that HA is planning to action not only the author, but also (every company on the strip got one) any company with staff that made copies or gave copies to their mates.
Rumor round is that HA is planning to action not only the author, but also (every company on the strip got one) any company with staff that made copies or gave copies to their mates.
Surely Woomera there must be some way of reporting it without falling foul of defamation laws.
For example if a newspaper got hold of it as a story could they report the claims in the article without being at risk?
What about if we get a dumbed down synopsis? My appetite is whetted!
Icarus, read Plovett's post below - I know Plovett to be a lawyer and give credability to his post. Voice is also quoting similar sentiments and warnings. PPRuNe has no interest in being part of the action by having the allegations up in lights on any PPRuNe forum.
PPRuNe has rules. This is solely a matter of the operator concerned.
Woomera
For example if a newspaper got hold of it as a story could they report the claims in the article without being at risk?
What about if we get a dumbed down synopsis? My appetite is whetted!
Icarus, read Plovett's post below - I know Plovett to be a lawyer and give credability to his post. Voice is also quoting similar sentiments and warnings. PPRuNe has no interest in being part of the action by having the allegations up in lights on any PPRuNe forum.
PPRuNe has rules. This is solely a matter of the operator concerned.
Woomera
Last edited by Woomera; 10th Apr 2004 at 23:03.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gotmygearup
As I said its been a long time however a little research has revealed that HA may have separate actions for the "republication" of the item. A lot depends on what constitutes publication in the NT.
However I would have thought that he would have had problems proving who did copy the article and pass it on. Besides, I would have thought that he has a few other problems than trying to track down all and sundry who may have copied the thing and passed it on.
HA needs to realise that lawyers have a saying that the only people who win defamation actions are lawyers. A court room is privileged territory and a lot of dirty washing can come out in a defamation action.
Hope some of this helps.
As I said its been a long time however a little research has revealed that HA may have separate actions for the "republication" of the item. A lot depends on what constitutes publication in the NT.
However I would have thought that he would have had problems proving who did copy the article and pass it on. Besides, I would have thought that he has a few other problems than trying to track down all and sundry who may have copied the thing and passed it on.
HA needs to realise that lawyers have a saying that the only people who win defamation actions are lawyers. A court room is privileged territory and a lot of dirty washing can come out in a defamation action.
Hope some of this helps.
Join Date: Jan 1998
Location: somewhere in the nth of Oz, where it isn't really cold
Posts: 884
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PLovett
I concur with your last post.
It appears that HA would have re-dress not only against the original author/distributor, but also anyone else who then copied it and forwarded it on. It is not a defence to an action to claim repetition, each repetition = 1 publication.
I am not real sure how that could be proven, (who copied it again and who received it). There would need to be a few loyal HA fans pointing fingers who would be prepared to give evidence methinks.
Icarus2001
Don't tempt fate buddy. Anything from that original doc. that is copied in any part and entered onto this BB then renders that poster and the ICH and ISP liable to an action by HA.
Not only that, anyone who copies the doc. and emails it to anyone else also could incur the wrath of a writ.
It is simply NOT worth it.
As for the media ... they tread a very fine line everytime they publish an article about anything.
However there is a defence known as fair reporting .. that is it is information for the public, published without malice or an improper reason and reported fairly and accurately.
** I hasten to add, I am not in any way shape or form connected to HA, his company nor anyone associated in any way with him or his company. Nor have I seen the 'original' offending document.**
I concur with your last post.
It appears that HA would have re-dress not only against the original author/distributor, but also anyone else who then copied it and forwarded it on. It is not a defence to an action to claim repetition, each repetition = 1 publication.
I am not real sure how that could be proven, (who copied it again and who received it). There would need to be a few loyal HA fans pointing fingers who would be prepared to give evidence methinks.
Icarus2001
Don't tempt fate buddy. Anything from that original doc. that is copied in any part and entered onto this BB then renders that poster and the ICH and ISP liable to an action by HA.
Not only that, anyone who copies the doc. and emails it to anyone else also could incur the wrath of a writ.
It is simply NOT worth it.
As for the media ... they tread a very fine line everytime they publish an article about anything.
However there is a defence known as fair reporting .. that is it is information for the public, published without malice or an improper reason and reported fairly and accurately.
** I hasten to add, I am not in any way shape or form connected to HA, his company nor anyone associated in any way with him or his company. Nor have I seen the 'original' offending document.**
Last edited by The Voice; 10th Apr 2004 at 23:41.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: OZ
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just adding to the top end saga,
Was told a few days ago that at one place in particular your in the Hangar for 6 months, on call 7d a week for hangar rat work, for $200 bucks plus mow the bosses lawn and look after the kids as well!
Surely not?
Sounds nasty up there!
Was told a few days ago that at one place in particular your in the Hangar for 6 months, on call 7d a week for hangar rat work, for $200 bucks plus mow the bosses lawn and look after the kids as well!
Surely not?
Sounds nasty up there!
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whats amazing is that if HA had a job going tomorow,He would be flooded with pillets saying they will do anything to get some flying.Wash cars ,mow lawns ,wash a/c,ect,ect.The only reason you get a start doing **** jobs is so they can see what you are really like.And if they dont like what they see and you dont get a start,pillets run of crying wolf!!!
You cant tell me pillets come up north to make a career out of GA,Shouldnt it be to get hours and get the hell out Move on and let the next 200 hour cpl get a start.
Im not saying its right how some companys conduct there buisness but we all know what we are getting our selfs in for in the first place.I work for a company that does pay the award but we still have wingers.
The GA industry is in a very sad state of affair.
You cant tell me pillets come up north to make a career out of GA,Shouldnt it be to get hours and get the hell out Move on and let the next 200 hour cpl get a start.
Im not saying its right how some companys conduct there buisness but we all know what we are getting our selfs in for in the first place.I work for a company that does pay the award but we still have wingers.
The GA industry is in a very sad state of affair.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,082
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Excuse my ignorance.
Question for the folks with some legal knowledge on this thread.
Had said document been forwarded only to the regulator, would there still be a case of defamation to answer?
Question for the folks with some legal knowledge on this thread.
Had said document been forwarded only to the regulator, would there still be a case of defamation to answer?